996
i will never understand scientific fraud (files.catbox.moe)
submitted 2 years ago* by to c/science_memes@mander.xyz
84 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

like you go to the not-believing-until-seeing convention with lies and what? expect to get away with it?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 27 points 2 years ago (2 children)

This is also the reason why failed experiments hardly ever get published: "We tried X to achieve Y but it did not work because of Z" is very useful information for people also thinking about trying X, but good luck publishing that paper.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago

    I'll repeat it as much as I can but we need yo open up new journals for these kind of things.

    All we need is a good cloud for storage, and volunteers. I think comp-sci people do that with https://arxiv.org/

    The journal should accept any user submitted papers but have ranking based on other people, like successful reproducible studies (which is also accepted in journal) will be linked to the original journal. Reviews and such can be their own articles but also linked to the journal.

    That way, undergrads can do projects reproducing previous studies (given resources) which will still give them research credit. Failures and exploration will also give people credit as it helps other people's research. We can just tag papers for novel ideas,failures, reproducing old paper,reviews, etc.

    I think it has a chance to be very useful if we can pull it off. Although it'll have the same problems as of social media with upvote system. So some more thoughts needs to be there for the actual implementation.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent